Re: [apps-discuss] font/*

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Fri, 11 November 2011 19:52 UTC

Return-Path: <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7F6D21F8560 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:52:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BVsSTAebyukE for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:52:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F24D21F84AF for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:52:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O8AM6KB24G00205E@mauve.mrochek.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:48:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O8ALRTHV3K00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:48:52 -0800 (PST)
Message-id: <01O8AM6GDT5000RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:46:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Fri, 11 Nov 2011 16:27:50 +0900" <4EBCCE76.2090807@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed
References: <4EB86078.8070904@stpeter.im> <BDC0F178EEB88CC4B3D24020@PST.JCK.COM> <4EB8D0F4.9020907@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <24FBF40353ABCC3A4F15E82B@PST.JCK.COM> <4EBB2B83.3060901@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <01O88AB2EM7S00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <4EBBB0EE.8050502@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <01O88YVG6MQY00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <4EBCCE76.2090807@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Cc: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] font/*
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:52:19 -0000

> On 2011/11/11 1:23, Ned Freed wrote:

> >> On 2011/11/10 13:06, Ned Freed wrote:

> >> > In practice the issue of what to register where has never been much
> >> of a
> >> > problem. Speaking now as media types reviewer, I have not infrequently
> >> > pushed
> >> > back on top-level type choices, usually successfully and always
> >> amicably.
> >
> >> Do you know of any examples? This could help Dave with the general list
> >> of criteria that he wants to develop.
> >
> > I can't get into specifics without talking about the content of
> > preliminary registration requests, which I try not to do. I can say that
> > the most common one has been someone asking for application when image or
> > video would be more appropriate.
> >
> > The most common name change I request, however, is the addition of +xml.

> Okay. This is about change from one existing top-level type to another,
> and about tweaking the minor type name with a suffix.

Understood. Both things happen. As I said, the most common top level change
is from application to image or video. Next up would probably moves from
text to application, but come to think of it I haven't have one of those
in a while.

> Out of the context
> of the discussion, I thought that you were speaking about new top-level
> types when you wrote "I have not infrequently pushed back on top-level
> type choices", but now I see that that's not a necessary interpretation.

I was simply noting that the most common change isn't a top-level change, but
rather the addition of +xml. My apologies if that was confusing.

				Ned